1. RETENTION(N): DOING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND EXPECTING DIFFERENT RESULTS (INSANITY)

2.  Beginning Postsecondary Survey (BPS) is administered by the National Center for Education Statistics at the U.S. Department of Education. They track a representative sample of students who enter college in a given year and look at whether they graduated  1996-2001- graduation rate of 62.7%  2003-2009- graduation rate of 63.2%  Graduation and Retention Rates have not change significantly over the last 20+ years. THE NATIONAL LEVEL

3.  As we begin working on retention issues at Ozarks, we’ve starting looking at things from a different perspective  Why do we do things the way we do?  Are the “best practices” working?  Retention rates don’t tell us that they are… ………Can we find a different way? MILLENIALS

4.  First year seminars and experiences  Common intellectual experiences  Learning communities  Writing-intensive courses  Collaborative Assignments and projects  Diversity/Global learning  Service learning, community-based learning  Internships  Capstone courses and projects BEST PRACTICES IN STUDENT ENGAGEMENT KUH*

5.  They increase the odds that students will:  Invest time and effort  Interact with faculty and peers about substantive matters  Experience diversity  Get more frequent feedback  Reflect & integrate learning  Discover relevance of learning through real-world applications  We have great NSSE engagement scores…. But retention is still an issue DOES IT WORK?

6. Criteria  First Generation College Students  High School GPA  SAT/ACT Scores  Socio-economic Status Solutions  Study Skills  Remedial Courses  Time Management  Early Intervention TRADITIONAL AT RISK STUDENTS Is it working???

7.  EITHER we aren’t administering these practices correctly  OR we aren’t looking at the right thing  … or both EITHER/OR

8.  “People’s beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise influence over events” (Bandura 1994)  High academic self-efficacy has traditionally been the focus of self-efficacy research SELF-EFFICACY

9.  Self-Efficacy  Involvement  Its Effect on Persistence OUR RESEARCH QUESTION

10. We propose that self-efficacy as it pertains to student involvement can be a predictor to academic success This way, we can focus on students with low self- efficacy through programs and services encourage and improve involvement self-efficacy! INSTEAD OF TRADITIONAL AT RISK MARKERS…

11. OUR RESEARCH

12.  45 students participated  Freshmen who received 1 of 4 institutional scholarships were chosen  Assessment tool was self made*  Administered survey at the end of September  Measured involvement through the end of October  Retrieved mid-term grades at end of October PROCEDURES

13.  Traditional academic self-efficacy scale  Added questions of our own  25 items  23 were broken into 2 sub-scores  Academic  Involvement/Transitional Issues THE INSTRUMENT

14.  Flagged Students as “At Risk”  Some were flagged using traditional methods  High school GPA, ACT/SAT score, first generation status, low income  Some were flagged according to their involvement  Waited for mid-term grades to be released  Compared different “At Risk” methods to see which is most accurate  Analyzed data to see if self-efficacy scores could predict mid- term grades METHODS

15. PRELIMINARY RESULTS

16.  Males- 20  Females- 25  Avg. ACT- 24.4  Ozarks avg. 23  Minority Status- 9  Asian American- 1  African American- 6  Hispanic- 1  Native American- 1  White- 36  ACT >20- 11  1 st Gen- 21  Pell Grant- 20 DEMOGRAPHICS

17. RISK PROXY Traditional At Risk Students:  0 risk factors- 14  1 risk factor- 11  2 risk factors- 13  3 risk factors- 6  4 risk factors- 1 14 Not at risk 31 at risk students Criteria  Minority Status  ACT > 20  Pell Grant Recipient  1 st Generation Status

18. THE BASICS

19. INVOLVED/NOT-INVOLVED STUDENTS AND THEIR MID-TERM GPA’S

20. OBSERVATIONS/ SUGGESTIONS

21.  Bandura (1994) proposes that people’s beliefs about their own self-efficacy come from 4 sources:  Mastery Experiences - Accomplishment  Vicarious Experiences – Modeling  Social Persuasion – Encouragement/Motivation  Emotional & Stress Reactions – Coping & Managing Anxiety SOURCES OF SELF-EFFICACY Study Skills Motivation Time management Bobble head reaction Bounces right off Teach the same concepts- USE A DIFFERENT APPROACH!

22.  Expand freshmen opportunities to take on leadership positions.  Take advantage of and target “feeder” organizations such as Hall Government and Activities Boards  Offer leadership positions/officer positions for freshmen, specifically  Use residence hall experiences as mastery experiences  Develop a program in the residence halls in which RAs teach and allow residents to lead hall programming  Allow residents to be “in charge” of varying tasks in the halls (laundry/kitchen/lobby maintenance or cleanliness)  Be creative and invent tasks! MASTERY EXPERIENCES Any other ideas??

23.  Leadership Development  If you have any kind of leadership development programs, have your leaders invite freshmen prospects  This helps them see what it is like (and privileges of) being involved VICARIOUS EXPERIENCES Any other ideas??

24. This can be very effective, freshmen don’t know better!  Mentoring Programs  Give freshmen the opportunity to look up to someone  Give freshmen access to those students that you would WANT them to look up to SOCIAL PERSUASION Any other ideas??

25.  Being shown reality  They aren’t the only one’s who have been where they are right now  Coaching from those who understand/they can relate to MODIFICATION OF STRESS REACTIONS Any other ideas??

26.  Look closer at the data, see what it is telling us  Make meaning  Possibility of re-administering the survey  Do scores change?  What are you doing with self-efficacy?  Resilience session today NEXT STEPS

27.  Kuh, George D. “What Matters to Student Success.”4 th Annual Student Success Symposium. 2011.  Bandura, A. “Self-efficacy.” In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press. 1994  DiRamio, D., & Payne, R. (2007). Assessing the relationship between campus programs, student self-efficacy, stress, and substance abuse. College Student Journal, Retrieved from http://www.auburn.edu/~diramdc/csj2007.pdf REFERENCES